137 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32616449)
1. Touch preparation for rapid onsite evaluations of renal mass biopsies: concordance rate, pearls, and pitfalls.
Ponce-Zepeda J; Nowroozizadeh B; Lu D; Farzaneh T; Han M
J Am Soc Cytopathol; 2020; 9(5):422-428. PubMed ID: 32616449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Cytomorphology of renal angiomyolipoma: performance and accuracy of touch preparation of core needle biopsy.
Gelarden IA; Gama A; Choy B
J Am Soc Cytopathol; 2023; 12(2):142-152. PubMed ID: 36702738
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Rapid on-site evaluation in percutaneous core needle biopsies of renal masses: Cytologic-histologic concordance and diagnostic challenges.
Hojat SA; Ravish NA; Azabdaftari G; Yang Z
Diagn Cytopathol; 2023 Aug; 51(8):480-487. PubMed ID: 37096957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Utility of fine-needle aspiration and core biopsy with touch preparation in the diagnosis of renal lesions.
Scanga LR; Maygarden SJ
Cancer Cytopathol; 2014 Mar; 122(3):182-90. PubMed ID: 24353131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The success rate of small renal mass core needle biopsy and its impact on lowering benign resection rate.
Gao H; Nowroozizadeh B; Zepeda JP; Landman J; Farzaneh T; Johnson C; Hosseini H; Han M
BMC Urol; 2023 Nov; 23(1):189. PubMed ID: 37980518
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Improving ROSE: Discrepant touch preparation and histology findings in cytology of renal masses: A 10-year retrospective review.
Shachner TR; Nodit L; Hubbard E; Van Meter S
Diagn Cytopathol; 2019 Oct; 47(10):999-1006. PubMed ID: 31190420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Impact of touch preparations on core needle biopsies.
Tong LC; Rudomina D; Rekhtman N; Lin O
Cancer Cytopathol; 2014 Nov; 122(11):851-4. PubMed ID: 24946755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Percutaneous biopsy of the renal mass: FNA or core needle biopsy?
Yang CS; Choi E; Idrees MT; Chen S; Wu HH
Cancer Cytopathol; 2017 Jun; 125(6):407-415. PubMed ID: 28334518
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Is Core Needle Biopsy Reliable in Differentiating Between Aggressive Benign and Malignant Radiolucent Bone Tumors?
Hegde V; Burke ZDC; Park HY; Zoller SD; Johansen D; Kelley BV; Levine B; Motamedi K; Federman NC; Seeger LL; Nelson SD; Bernthal NM
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2018 Mar; 476(3):568-577. PubMed ID: 29529643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Categorizing renal oncocytic neoplasms on core needle biopsy: a morphologic and immunophenotypic study of 144 cases with clinical follow-up. Alderman MA, Daignault S, Wolf JS Jr, Palapattu GS, Weizer AZ, Hafez KS, Kunju LP, Wu AJ. Hum Pathol.September 2016;55:1-10.
Kryvenko ON
Urol Oncol; 2017 Jun; 35(6):452-453. PubMed ID: 28416106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluation of diagnostic accuracy and a practical algorithmic approach for the diagnosis of renal masses by FNA.
Lau HD; Kong CS; Kao CS
Cancer Cytopathol; 2018 Sep; 126(9):782-796. PubMed ID: 30193011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Circularity Index on Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography Helps Distinguish Fat-Poor Angiomyolipoma from Renal Cell Carcinoma: Retrospective Analyses of Histologically Proven 257 Small Renal Tumors Less Than 4 cm.
Kang HS; Park JJ
Korean J Radiol; 2021 May; 22(5):735-741. PubMed ID: 33660463
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Sonographically guided renal mass biopsy: indications and efficacy.
Johnson PT; Nazarian LN; Feld RI; Needleman L; Lev-Toaff AS; Segal SR; Halpern EJ
J Ultrasound Med; 2001 Jul; 20(7):749-53; quiz 755. PubMed ID: 11444733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Diagnostic value and accuracy of imprint cytology evaluation during image-guided core needle biopsies: Review of our experience at a large academic center.
Kubik MJ; Bovbel A; Goli H; Saremian J; Siddiqi A; Masood S
Diagn Cytopathol; 2015 Oct; 43(10):773-9. PubMed ID: 26119885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Categorizing renal oncocytic neoplasms on core needle biopsy: a morphologic and immunophenotypic study of 144 cases with clinical follow-up.
Alderman MA; Daignault S; Wolf JS; Palapattu GS; Weizer AZ; Hafez KS; Kunju LP; Wu AJ
Hum Pathol; 2016 Sep; 55():1-10. PubMed ID: 27085554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Histogram analysis of small solid renal masses: differentiating minimal fat angiomyolipoma from renal cell carcinoma.
Chaudhry HS; Davenport MS; Nieman CM; Ho LM; Neville AM
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2012 Feb; 198(2):377-83. PubMed ID: 22268181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Predictive Value of Chemical-Shift MRI in Distinguishing Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma From Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma and Minimal-Fat Angiomyolipoma.
Jhaveri KS; Elmi A; Hosseini-Nik H; Hedgire S; Evans A; Jewett M; Harisinghani M
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Jul; 205(1):W79-86. PubMed ID: 26102422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Renal mass biopsy using Raman spectroscopy identifies malignant and benign renal tumors: potential for pre-operative diagnosis.
Liu Y; Du Z; Zhang J; Jiang H
Oncotarget; 2017 May; 8(22):36012-36019. PubMed ID: 28415596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Tuberose sclerosis complex: analysis of growth rates aids differentiation of renal cell carcinoma from atypical or minimal-fat-containing angiomyolipoma.
Patel U; Simpson E; Kingswood JC; Saggar-Malik AK
Clin Radiol; 2005 Jun; 60(6):665-73; discussion 663-4. PubMed ID: 16038693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Does renal mass biopsy influence multidisciplinary treatment recommendations?
Lobo JM; Clements MB; Bitner DP; Mikula MD; Noona SW; Sultan MI; Cathro HP; Lambert DL; Schenkman NS; Krupski TL
Scand J Urol; 2020 Feb; 54(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 31868063
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
